User talk:Kudpung/Archive Sep 2012

Hi Kudpung, I'm sorry if I mis-interpreted this edit, which I understood to mean that you believed admins chose who got access to STiki and their word could not be over-ridden by non-admins. The us-them divide has always been a bugbear of mine and I know it's something I may be over-zealous with.

Regarding the wider CVUA issues, they are looking to implement my suggested changes at the end of the week. I believe those who were causing the other issues are aware of them and I've not seen problems with that either. Some of our other worries appear to be unfounded, such as CVUA trying to foist inexperienced editors into NPP. I believe this was because WT:NPP included a CVU banner - CVU and CVUA are seperate entities. (It may be best to remove the banner anyway)

Given time, I'm sure the project will keep improving. I also don't want to see these enthusiastic editors demoralised, Wikipedia has a problem with editor retention and there have been suggestions that this is partially due to the critical environment. As one of our more experienced editors, I'm sure you've seen general opinion on the way we do things change, the last thing I think we should be doing is stifling those editors who's bright ideas may be the start of a new Wikipedia environment. Worm^TT(talk) 15:15, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

CVU and CVU/A are currently 'run' by the same people. If anyone is to blame, it's me for encouraging those I accord Rollback and Reviewer rights to, to help out at NPP - but only if I believe they can manage it. Others probably see those comments and think it applies to everyone. Part of my reaction over Stiki was due to the use over the weekend by one of the 'stars' of CVU who created havoc across over 500 articles by using a bugged script. Knowing who it was, I didn't block to stop the disruption, and my humour and handling of the issue was taken in very good faith, and it finally worked out well with all concerned. Those who criticise my 'attitude' fail to notice these things. Your advice to me, unlike some emails I've been getting from the CVU crew, is always taken very seriously and in the very best of good faith :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:05, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

PS. You may also wish to see this conversation that took pace earlier this evening. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:12, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

When I read the comments that this incident stemmed from, I was immediately taken aback. Kudpung's tone was a little waspish. Definitely not something that I'm used to seeing. After reading back over everything, especially the little incident with Stiki, I'm actually going to give him kudos for maintaining as pleasant of a demeanor as he has. As I commented on the CVUA talk page earlier this evening, I feel that the project is near totally useless as a training tool. HOWEVER, it is one of those gateway projects that integrate new users into Wikipedia. And as such, I think it's dangerous to be too quick to write it off as a bad idea. I have looked over a lot of the people who drive that project and while they are often inexperienced and young, they all seem to have their hearts in the right place. Trusilver 04:53, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi TrueSilver. Thanks for your input. Just to put the record straight in case your comments are misread by other users here (a common fault with written communication which is also dangerous), I have never even remotely suggested that the project should be written off as a bad idea. I don't even concur that it is a totally uselses training tool. Moreover, I firmly belive that it has an essential function. I have aways stated that I appreciate the enthusiasm nd the time the regulars spend on it, but with all the social banter, misplaced daughter projects, active members being blocked and having their tools revoked, and others leaving leaving the project for reasons of disenchantment, I and other editors have expressed the need for a more mature approach to the task, and much, much less bureaucracy. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:12, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I mostly agree. The project suffers from an extreme case of Parkinson's Bicycle Shed Effect. For every twenty seconds the drivers of CVUA spend addressing the the correct methods to teach countervandalism, they spend an hour hand-wringing over pointless bureaucracy. Case in point: I made a post to the CVUA talk page the other day addressing several key issues surrounding the project as well as one minor quibbling suggestion that was almost to the point of irrelevance. Which one of these items did they latch onto and talk about? The irrelevant one. I found myself just sitting in my chair here chuckling and shaking my head. These are all good people, and I think they ARE an asset to the project, however misplaced I currently find their efforts to be. I think they seriously need a strong coordinator to the project, preferable one that is old enough to be taken seriously. (it shouldn't be an issue, but it really is) If someone asked for volunteers, I would be planting my foot into Worm That Turned's backside and shoving him out front. Trusilver 23:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I see that you share my thoughts exactly but I have to cast my mind back nearly 50 years to when I was in that age group. At school we were constantly creating and organising clubs along with all their hierarchies. Strong leaderships surfaced but unfortunately those with the charisma were often ones who were least suited for the actual tasks involved (too much polit-talk and too little action), while others quietly went about putting things write (pun intended). We all resented any advice from outside (have fun reading the entire thread). One only needs to look at this, total up the the number of edits that went into them all, and realise how that time could have been spent on actual counter-vandalism or tutoring. I started the ball rolling with getting the issues addressed, mainly because of the badgering and unnecessary 'clerking' at PERM, but even that didn't work. Worm stepped in at CVU and took the lead with offering some sound advice and although he is wise, experienced, and perhaps more diplomatic than I am, his gentle words were acknowledged but received no action. People say that change takes time, but it has been going on for weeks now and I don't see any happening. I've said that one can't see the wood for the trees in the forest of CVU/CVUA pages, and the pages look like Christmas trees - also rather reminiscent of the cool 'go faster' stripes youngsters used to stick on their cars - including me! The bike shed is an excellent analogy (I didn't know about that essay) and also brings to mind an area on which I am a coord - without any special authority - hundreds of articles have just one line about the school, and the rest is about their sports results, the dozens of 5-member clubs, and of course the food in the canteen. I realise that because they think it was hard work making them, it would be difficult for them to accept that they need to scrap most of the pages and the decorations. Not content with the plethora of user rights, some editors are even campaigning for more. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:28, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I think I have arrived at the same position you have, and I totally wash my hands of those people. I can name a dozen different anti-vandalism patrollers just off the top of my head who have more experience than ten of their so-called "instructors". (I wish that was an exaggeration, but it's really not) They seem to really enjoy outside comments on their project... particularly when they are positive comments. If they are offered criticism, they simply pick out the parts that they like and blissfully pretend the rest never happened. They are going about right now figuring out how to create metrics to verify how successful their programs is... let bureaucracy reign!! I know what you are talking about when it comes to schools, though. I have always had a soft spot toward school articles, even when they are clearly crufty and/or non-notable, just because I know that school articles are how a lot of teenage editors get their first edits on the project. With schools, much like the CVUA, I feel that we can afford the ability to not take them QUITE as seriously as other content. I'm sure there are certain humorless people who will be lighting torches to burn me at the stake for even suggesting this, but I think that when the cafeteria menu or something equally unencyclopedic for Whocaresville High School is put on the article, I will scrutinize it for a moment and then walk right past it when I'm doing recent change patrolling. Should I revert? Probably, but it's an article that very few people are going to read, and it has the possibility of developing a new editor who might later be an asset to the project. I view CVUA in the same way... a gross misappropriation of time. BUT, it really doesn't hurt anyone or anything to let it exist, and good may come out of it in the long run. Trusilver 22:33, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Please do revert any senseless trivia from school articles when yo come across it. I use a special toolserver watchlist for school articles but I don't catch them all by any means. I wouldn't say that nobody reads school articles - I just got a high school up to GA and it's been reported in the local press! Wikipedia's first UK high school GA. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:16, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations on that! I'd be very interested in seeing it. The link? Trusilver 08:15, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

HCGS. I spent 2 days climbing around in the school's 500 year old attic looking through old records when I was in the UK last year. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:26, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your support in my RfA. I hope to maintain your trust in me.—Bagumba (talk) 21:03, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Carthage44 was blocked indefintely a while back along with 74.94.112.249 (2 weeks). The IP is actively editing again with the same baseball theme of Chicago White Sox related articles. Being that editing in the past with this static IP coincided with blocks to Carthage44, and given the current theme of the edits, I would assume this is a continuing sock.—Bagumba (talk) 21:09, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I would assume so too and it looks pretty obvious to me and it has been established that they are the same although they made a weak claim of innocence that was declined. As you are now an admin, you can use your discretion whether to re-block or not. I would suggest a longer block this time, with account creation blocked, and check to see if any new accounts editing the same pages have been created while the block was on. Good luck! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:00, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

As I interacted in the past with the user before becoming an admin, I'll err on being conservative and consider myself "involved". I'll report at SPI. Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 14:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I think that is a perfectly reasonable decision. It's also the reason why I will not get further involved as I made the first block. There's nothing to stop you reopening the case though. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:54, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Opened at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Carthage44. Especially since I filed what I thought was a clear-cut case at AN3 that was denied on a stricter interpretation of edit-warring than I would have used, I'm sitting back and observing on cases where I'm involved. No desire for drama :-)—Bagumba (talk) 15:07, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I've been around a long time but I'm also rather new to the SPI process itself. It's not an area that I generally take much active interest in but through my work on deletions I tend to end up discovering a lot of cases of socking. This particular case should be able to be quickly cut and dried per WP:DUCK because the user actually admits to using the same computer. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:23, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi there

Thank you for notifying me about the deletion of "Garrison Border Town of Elvas and its Fortifications".

I do not agree with the deletion which was already done. It is usual for articles refering to a world heritage site to be separated from the article of the city/place itself where this site is located.

The information of the original article I created is now not present anywhere.

I will recreate the original article.

Best,

Z. Zdtrlik (talk) 09:07, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. It hasn't actually been deleted. You can find it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Garrison_Border_Town_of_Elvas_and_its_Fortifications&oldid=505697830 to recreate the article, simply undo the redirect by using the 'undo' in the edit history. Do not simply copy the content and paste it into a new article. If you need any help, let me know. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:18, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Good evening :) I just passed the article. Pardon me for the delay but I can't find any problems left within. Cheers! TheSpecialUser ^TSU 21:58, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

"There are also close on 1,000 other guidelines and policies to help your editing." No wonder everyone is confused and fighting each other! Rich Farmbrough, 03:08, 30 August 2012 (UTC).

One of my typical tongue-in-the-cheek exaggerations, but if one counts all the essays too, it might be getting close. Even still keep stumbling across new ones, and I'm often confued. One of the annoying things is that so many pages link to other versions of the same thing. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:12, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung! I found a tool (from Dennis Brown's RFA) that tracks your CSD nominations. I have made a log of those CSD nominations which can be found here. Additionally, I have enabled Twinkle's CSD and PROD logs. What do you think about my nominations? Best, Electric Catfish 14:32, 30 August 2012 (UTC).

There have been non-stop vandalism and addition in this list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Boston_University_people

No vandalim. And who are you? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:25, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi there! I don't know how familiar you are with football/soccer, and particular European, and especially English football, but from the close of the season until 31 August, players are allowed to be transfered. As such, players even vaguely linked with moves have their pages changed. This is exacerbated by wild twitter rumours, fans lust for another team's player etc until WP player pages are a mess! As such, I've protected Dzeko's page as it kept getting changed that he plays for Arsenal. He doesn't, but some fans think he a) should b) has signed c) is about to sign etc. Until it's a done deal and has reliable sources, we can only say he plays for his current club (in this case Man City).

Almost every football player that comes onto RfPP around deadline day ends up getting protected till early September when it all calms down again. Until January, when we get another month of it! So I hope you don't mind me revisting your RfPP request (it had been added to), and for letting you know about the madness of the transfer window. And apologies if you knew all that anyway! Ged UK 14:28, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ged. You'll find this strange for an Englishman, but I don't have the foggiest idea about soccer, no interest, and don't want to know. All I know is that 22 men kick a ball around a field, earn a huge amount of money for it, and millions of people go mad over the game. As you'll see from my user page, I also have an aversion to the 1000s of one-line, one-reference soccer bios - and that's why I can't even be bothered to patrol them. You are more than welcome to protect the article as much as you like, even dig a hole and bury it ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:39, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest; most of my friends couldn't give a rat's whosit about it either. I just wish there was a button we could press when the transfer window opens that would protect all footballer's articles until September! WOuld stop RfPP getting cluttered! Ged UK 14:53, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung! I've always wondered what the purpose of the {{db-animal}} template was. What is considered a non-notable or insignificant animal? I've created a few fish stubs, and TAP has created thousands of stubs of species of beetles. The only article about an animal that I've ever speedied was Smeebling (it's actually a hoax and you'll probably get a good laugh about it). Best, Electric Catfish 20:54, 31 August 2012 (UTC).

An animal with a real name such as a race horse, a pet, a famous circus elephant, or a panda in a zoo, etc. See this. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

PLEASE REMOVE THE PERSONAL SECTION ON "MARK MALONE", I AM HIS EX WIFE AND SOMEONE IS EDITING IT WITH COMPLETE LIES. IT'S CAUSING ME TROUBLE AT MY BUSINESS, ETC. I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO TAKE LEGAL ACTION. WHEN I DELETE IT, YOU DON'T ALLOW IT, BUT YOU ALLOW THE LIES???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.194.7.15 (talk) 01:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello. If you want me to look into this, firstly please don't shout. Secondly, making legal threats or implying that you will make them is taken extremely negatively on Wikipedia. Please follow this link and read about it: WP:NLT, and then read WP:LBL for advice on the action you can take. And finally, we have no reason to believe that you are who you say you are. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

My apologies. While I've seen several discussions, I had not realised you had been mentoring him as well. Otherwise, I would have notified you as I did keilana. - jc37 01:37, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

No worries. I have everything he does on my watchlist anyway, and I also keep a regular eye on most AN/I cases :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:41, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Could you take a look at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled for me? A billion thank yous! TBran dl ey 02:43, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

See my comments there and please do ot canvass admins - we have the PERM pages on our watchlists. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:58, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Note that ItsZippy has previously revoked this user's AutoPatrolled rights.--Anderson - What's up? 19:59, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

And...? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:26, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

That is all.--Anderson - What's up? 05:19, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I probably shouldn't have added that Perm TB. I saw the note you left for TBrandley hinting you have PERM pages on your watchlist.--Calm As Midnight (talk) 09:49, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

You questioned me about a reference to the song of the album called "Everything Has Changed" (feat. Ed Sheeran) and I can't find any but it was said in an interview so can I reference the interview? here at 2 mins http://www.mtv.co.uk/artists/taylor-swift/video/taylor-swift-talks-inspiration-behind-never-ever-hit --Justinhaff (talk) 11:17, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately an interview is not a reliable source because it contains information a subject said about themselves: WP:PRIMARY. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:25, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I've fixed the closure. If you ever go for it again, here are the instructions :) TheSpecialUser ^TSU 15:02, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I know, thanks. I realised what I had done but my connection went off and I was still trying to figure it out. Cheers. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:04, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

You told me to tell you if it was without my consent. It certainly was. I have no idea where he got my username from... I'll be commenting on the request so you can close it shortly. Thanks for your assistance. Silvrous (talk) 15:59, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks, because in a few moments I'm probably going to block him for vandalism. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:01, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Lecen not only took part in the edit war, but was actually the one who started it and ignored the talk page. Where's his warning?

Did you even read the talk page? Lecen complained to the noticeboard before joining the discussion in the talk page, despite my invitations to discussion. --I. N. Keller (talk) 16:37, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. You're not being rude at all. I had read the talk page and it doesn't matter who is wrong or who is right, technically you were both edit warring and over the limit. However, those edit summaries for communication are not a cool way to communicate either, and they are disruptive. I omitted to warn Lecen because I'm having terrible problems with my connection today and I meant to go back to it later. I was actually hesitating over protecting the page but one edit war between just two editors is not sufficient reason to do so. It's too late for me to warn him now so I will strike the warning on your page and feel free to delete it if you wish. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, sir. I don't really care about warnings, I simply object to special treatment, mainly because I don't deserve it --I. N. Keller (talk) 17:14, 1 September 2012 (UTC).

In hindsight, I've left a message on his talk page already. As it as a content dispute it should have been taken to WP:DRN anyway if it can't be resolved amicably amicably and not ANI. At ANI there could be a risk that you might both be blocked - which I did not do. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:18, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Regarding his comment below, I have been editing Wikipedia anonymously since at least 2005, but, unlike him, I don't do it for attribution. He's a great example of the editor who has made major contributions or written a whole article himself, and then rejects any attempts to improve it. By the way, the discussion of 16th of November did not "die out", hie simply ignored it completely.

If we decide to assess edits based on the past contributions of the editor instead of assessing the contribution's merits, we'll be driving many users away, both new and old. Using your "golden stars" as an argument is ludicrous; what bearing do his "golden stars" have on whether the article's title is good or not?

One last point: "ragamuffin" is NOT a translation for "farrapo." Farrapo means "rag". I challenge anyone to find a dictionary saying otherwise. --I. N. Keller (talk) 18:56, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not really bothered who is right or who is wrong as I have said before, and my talk page is not the place to battle it out and you both know where to take your dispute. That said, AFAIK maltrapilho is ragamuffin. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:15, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

And you are right. maltrapilho is a good translation for ragamuffin. Sorry for bothering you, I realise now you're very busy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imnotkeller (talk • contribs) 20:56, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your warning. Perhaps you're not aware, but I'm actually the only, I repeat, the only editor on Wikipedia in English who is writing articles about Brazilian imperial history. Did you see the golden stars at the top of my user page? Empire of Brazil, Pedro I of Brazil, Pedro II of Brazil, etc, etc.. The Brazilian military commander who quelled the Ragamuffin rebellion? That was Luís Alves de Lima e Silva, Duke of Caxias, another Featured Article I wrote. In other words: I'm actually the only person who has any real knowledge of Brazilian history around. But you instead chose to listen to a guy who has never contributed at all??

You also seem not to have paid attention to the development of the article about the War of the Ragamuffins. That was, and still is, a completely ignored article. I changed its name (and warned everyone) on 17 May 2011. No one complained. No one. Several months later, on 16 November 2011, a guy called Pinnecco complained, but the discussion died out and nothing happened. Now, on 31 August 2012 an editor called " I. N. Keller" who has never made any single contribution on Wikipedia changed the name of the article and reverted again when I opposed him. You shoudn't come to my talk page and accuse me of edit warring. I'm not forcing anything, he was and still is. The name "Ragamuffin" is the English translation of the Portuguese word "Farrapo" and is the name used on English sources about Brazilian imperial history. I'm not creating that out of nowhere, I woudln't have ten FAs about Brazilian imperial history if I didn't pay serious attention to sources. --Lecen (talk) 18:18, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

If I'm concerned with cases of edit warring I obviously don't do a review of the whole article. The effort is to stop the warring, not to establish who is right or wrong - it takes two to tango. The content or the name dispute is a matter for WP:DRN if it can't be resolved amicably as I have explained. What you could also do would be start a 'move' RfC on the article talk page and let the community decide on the name of the page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Just thought I'd let you know that Thmc1 is now embroiled in an edit war and angering several(at least 4 or 5) other users in the "Yosemite National Park" article by repeatedly reverting their edits. All this while still evading block and not logging in (173.63.176.93). Check out the article's talk page ! I've already reported to WP.AIV, but so far nothing. Now, what? MBaxter1 (talk) 18:48, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

AIV is for clear cases of vandalism. If it's a content dispute take it to DRN, if it's sockpuppetry take it to SPI, and if you are absolutely certain that admin intervention is required take it to AN/I. That said, I don't see much disruption on Yosemite National Park. And please stop yelling at me - it's not the way to get things done here. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

My apologies if it appeared that I was yelling at you. The goal was to get your atention, and not to yell! I'm just really miffed (and disappointed) at why you had originally blocked 173.63.176.93, and then reversed that decision. According to the investigation archives, there was barely any evidence(compared to what I brought up), and yet he was still blocked the first time. Even more puzzling is why a user who obviously violated a block for sockpuppeting is allowed to continue what is obviously the same kinds of disruptive edits (subtle vandalism) for which he was originally blocked. Has there been a change of protocol for conducting SPI since that time? Regards, MBaxter1 (talk) 17:39, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The probleis that we can't keep IPs blocked indefinitely. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:32, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Gotcha. if it's alright with you I will continue reporting anything that I find suspicious. Anyway, you mentioned previously that you were conducting an investigation of your own and came up with a few other people who might also be connected to Thmc1. By any chance, would one of the account names happen to begin with the letters "Kw......."?MBaxter1 (talk) 20:09, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

25? Really? Not so long time ago the bar was at 100 pages. Don't understand me wrong: I think that many bars in Wikipedia are simply too high (e.g. RfA/B, etc) but this is... say - nobody will check the created articles again (or say it will need it's time, maybe years!)... mabdul 20:27, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
PS: PLease remove the blinky stuff of your edit notice... :(

Golly, you mean people actually read my edit notice? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:34, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

No, it is going on my nervs while editing here. -.- mabdul 20:38, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Na und? Dein Pech, Alter ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:49, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The purpose of autopatrolled rights is to help reduce the backlog at NPP. I do not believe that there should be an arbitrary threshold attributed to autoreviewer rights, such as 50 or 100 articles created. The articles should be free of issues that NPPers have to correct or tag for, such as spelling and grammar mistakes, BLP issues, or NPOV vios. However, 17 articles isn't going to backlog up NPP. Electric Catfish 01:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

When I applied for the right 3 years ago I had made over 50 full-length articles. I applied because if a patroller was doing his/her job properly, it would have taken an hour to check them correctly. I wouldn't have dreamt of asking for the rights with less. Quality is more important than quantity, and if I see around 35 or so articles of the quality I write myself, I see no reason why not to accord, while 100 short stubs probably won't get my approval - they only take seconds to patrol. When checking for autopatrolled rights, I check all the articles up to the first 100, and also do checks that can only be made by admins, and those are the most important. Again therefore, there is really no need for 'clerking' on that page except for some help with archiving. I have no idea what criteria other admins apply, but I guess you all know by now that I am strict but fair (I hope), and always open to questions concerning my admin acts (nobody is perfect). Hope this helps. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:39, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh you're doing a great job at the PERM pages. Keep up doing such good work! Just wanted to know the rationale behind that shrinking threshold. mabdul 10:53, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	In case you weren't aware, I respect your judgement and am very glad for your comments as they help me further my knowledge. I would actually like to encourage you to make to make any comments because in the end, I find them helpful! Your work at WP:PERM is also much appreciated. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley _talk 03:54, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Riley. Actually, Keelan and his socks kept me up half the night chasing them around the site. All VOA and blocked now. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:38, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

thankyou for rollback :D --Lemon Twinkle 07:19, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. Use it wisely and only for blatant vandalism. From time to time I'll check in and see how you're doing and offer any advice.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:41, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

FYI. Please remember that CAPTCHAs are undoable for some of us. Courcelles 15:35, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

As a web developer, I am fully aware of that. The onus is on the applicant to explain why they want the rights, and on the MediaWiki devs to do something about it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:52, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I actually don't know why we would be declining this flag to anyone who is working in reasonably good faith and not making a mess. It is supposed to be trivial, not something that requires an extraordinary reason to get; all declining the flag does is makes other people's lives harder, and it isn't really fair to make them beg for such a trivial thing. Courcelles 00:12, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

AFAIK (according to a test I made 3 minutes ago, from an unconformed account of mine, and making an attempt at account creation) the CAPTCHA is only required when registering a new account. There may possibly be a bug or something else I am missing. Nevertheless, a more friendly approach to me might have been appropriate - the use in question hasn't even attempted one edit to mainspace yet. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:17, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I think that you also have to answer a CAPTHA when you try to provide an external link (to prevent spamming). Electric Catfish 11:22, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

CAPTCHA would make sense in that case, except that I think it would be best to try a different system for blocking out spam bots rather than getting people to punch in a set of difficult-to-read characters that appear onscreen. I agree with Courcelles above. Kurtis (talk) 18:57, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Regarding this response to my RFPP request for full protection of stevia, it seems you agreed to full protection but then semi-protected it. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:45, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry! I fully intended to full protect it. I've added another 48 hours - this time full protection, but it appears that things have died down already. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:26, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Not really, the full protection has encouraged talk page discussion, which was the point. Thanks. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:32, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Kudpungji, I am having a a problem with the article creator of Sibichen K Mathew who has been removing repeatedly maintenance templates (leaving messages like "Sorry will look into it......shortly). While the initial page was created through user name, subsequent edits are being done through an IP. The issue is mainly with notability and there are any number of these pages of mid-ranking and junior Indian civil service officers probably put up by their sycophants, progeny or those looking for a something in return. (Other examples I've come across are K. V. Jacob and Abhay Kumar.) I was just wondering if I should continue replacing the maintenance tags or give it up as a lost cause Sesamevoila (talk) 05:11, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Never give up on these issues, because the editors need to learn that they can't mess with Wikipedia and and have their own way against policies. However, don't get involved in an edit war by replacing the templates, but continue to issue incremental warnings if necessary. I'll take a look and reply again here later. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:48, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The IP and the user are obviously the same and connecting from the same building in Bangalore. I've left messages on all the accounts and more special ones on the main account. Check them out to see what I hav done. You'll find that we have hundreds of problems like these from Indian editors. It's mostly in good faith because they don't understand the rules (we had huge problems with our Education Programme in Pune last year). The other problem of course is that such articles often appear promotional (WP:PEACOCK) because they are written in Indian English which is noted for its flowery prose. While this is perfectly acceptable for the Indian sub continent, it almost always needs to be copyedited for the neutral standard English used on Wikipedia, which is more like American or British English or the English required for the IELTS exams. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:45, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

kudpunji,i am harish.I am sorry for the misdeeds done,i have cleared up the page,instead of tagging can u please help me by removing the peacock words....Thanks (Harishrawat11 (talk) 12:19, 4 September 2012 (UTC))

Hi Harish. Sesamevoila only means well. He is a very good Wikipedia editor and is from India. I have also lived and taught in India. I am sure that with his help you will be able to get the article up to scratch, and have the tags removed. You'll do fine - just remember to log in each time you edit. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:43, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung ! I have started my second editor review at Wikipedia:Editor review/TheGeneralUser (2). I will be greatly delighted, thankful and valued to have your review for me regarding my editing and possible candidate for Adminship. I see you also evaluate possible candidates for Adminship as you had chosen to do so on Wikipedia:Request an RfA nomination, so do evaluate me too! As you are a experienced and long term Wikipedian so i have asked for your kind review. Take your time to review my editing and give the best review that you can :). Feel free to ask me any questions you would like to on the review page itself. It will be a great honor to have you review me for which I will truly feel appreciated and helpful! I always work to improve Wikipedia and make it a more better place to be for Everyone :). Regards and Happy Editing! TheGeneralUser (talk) 19:15, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

thank you for understanding Harishrawat11 (talk) 01:31, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. We're all here to help :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:33, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Would you be willing to adopt me? I want to learn more about PERM and All types of vandalism so i can become a CVUA instructor,--Anderson - What's up? 05:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

The reason i decided to stop clerking is because now i realize it isn't really appropriate if admins are watching the PERM pages.--Anderson - What's up? 06:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

There's' not really a lot to learn about PERM beyond reading the descriptions of the tools/user rights on their respective home pages, and you don't really need to know anyway becuse you won't be ready for adminship for a very long time, and when you are, you'll know already by then. I'd like you also to stay away from requests for page protection too for the same reason, except for making request there, but please don't go overboard on that either - again like at PERM, most requests there are declined because page protection is not a silver bullet; it's done by admins after closely analysing the situation on the pages that might need to be protected.

I'm afraid I don't have enough time to mentor anyone at the moment because I'm very tied up with my own content work, looking after the pages we've discussed, and helping to develop other major solutions. Nevertheless, you are always most welcome to come here if you have any questions or need some advice. If you want to enter a full scale adoption programme, do check out the page at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user. Good luck! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:37, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

However, I'll still be watching your edits and I'll jump in with help and advice from time to to time. The first one is why you ignored this before adding your comment. Have you read the advice yet in your AN/I? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:27, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes.--Anderson - What's up? 02:32, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I unintentionally Added something to an IP's request at perm/c. I did remember not to, When Riley Huntly said at AN i had declined an IP's request due to the Mediawiki software not allowing anyone to add user rights for an IP editor.--Anderson - What's up? 02:33, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Anderson, from my view, you are failing to get the point. It is not about the why you closed the request, this is about you abusing the communities trust when you specially said you wouldn't. Besides, you made two edits to close that request, with the second edit you could have reverted your closure and mentioned at the AN/I that you forgot and accidently made the edit. Saying you unintentionally made the edit is not helping your situation nor the communities trust. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley _talk 02:51, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Since this discussion is now about Anderson's AN/I, please move any further comments to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive239#Rollback. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley _talk 02:58, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I will. I'm halfway between - and I have sleep problems. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:22, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

You also 'unitentionally' closed part of an ANI discussion. What people are saying is that you should stay away from alladmin areas. That mans also PERM, RPP, and commenting in areas where you yourself have insufficient knowledge and exprience, and that includes CVUA too. You also need to learn how to format talk page threads properly.There comes a time when it gets disruptive if editors have to follow you around the site and put right what you do wrong even if it was in good faith. If you don't start making an effort to follow the advice you have been given and agreed to, you'll end up being banned from those areas, and eventually blocked completely from Wikipedia. No one wants that to happen, least of all you, and we're all trying to help you understand. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:58, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I've decided rollback is unnecessary for me to have since i can revert vandalism at the same speed with twinkle.--Anderson - What's up? 03:01, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Anderson, this is clearly no longer about rollback, it is about your actions and how they are affecting everyone else. If you would have just apologized [above], this discussion would be going a whole different way. I suggest you follow the above advice. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley _talk 03:11, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I am going to start following advice.--Anderson - What's up? 03:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

That's about six time you've said that in the last 48 hours - have you forgotten that? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:19, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I must have forgotten that. I'm am not going to edit around these areas because i don't want to be topic banned.--Anderson - What's up? 03:29, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I have suggested a plan of action for Anderson at his talk page. Assuming he agrees, I believe this should help sort things. Worm^TT(talk) 09:31, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks enormously for chiming in Dave. (what happened to the message I sent you asking you to take a look?) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:44, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I've had a look at a few things recently after you requested it, but this user didn't fall into that category... perhaps it didn't save properly? We're quite lucky that he lives in New Zealand, there's a lot of articles in that area which could do with expansion or are missing all together. Turnbull Thomson Park was just the first landmark I saw when looking at the city on a map, and it looks like it's got a decent bit of history :) Worm^TT(talk) 09:27, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

He's going to have to be very careful - everything that was discussed on the recent AN was only the tip of the iceberg. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:14, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Hopefully, if his interests are steered away from clerking admin areas and towards areas he can dive in at, all will be well with the world. Unfortunately, from a timezone perspective, I'm not going to be much use - by the time I wake up in the morning he's been going all night... and if he does muck up, I won't be around to help out. Worm^TT(talk) 10:18, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

for asking sesame to help me Harishrawat11 (talk) 11:32, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for my user canvasses. I understand that I'm not as of yet ready for those user rights, and will come back later, without my canvass. Please except one of my homemade brownie as an apology. TBran dl ey 02:46, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Morning Kudpung. Following their transgression on Wednesday morning, User:Aicap123 is likely evading the block as User:14.102.118.42: history, diff, diff, and diff. Since there's a backlog at SPI, it seems reasonable to avoid introducing obvious and unnecessary cases where possible. Thanks, Mephistophelian (talk) 10:36, 6 September 2012 (UTC).

IPs can't upload files. IPs blocked and user reblocked.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:57, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the update Kudpung, I'll monitor the List of recognised political parties in India from 6 October when the protection expires. Best, Mephistophelian (talk) 10:12, 8 September 2012 (UTC).

it looks like someone keeps adding puff to this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Boston_University_people I am an alumnus

Not enough recent activity to justify page protection but several of us have it on our watchlists and you are welcome to do the fixes yourself. There are also a couple of other colleges with inflated alumni lists that need close attention - do let me know if you see recent unsourced additions to those. Thanks for your vigilance. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:39, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

You have been added to my friends list. Why don't you visit the list and read the two bullets at the top? I have added you because you have demonstrated to very friendly and courteous around me and I have seen you around meaning I have had the opportunity to evaluate you. I consider my friends to be kind, helpful, and clueful.—cyberpower ^Chat_{Limited Access} 17:24, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

It would be good to be an instructor, But I'm concerned they won't accept me for ignoring instructions not clerk anywhere.--Anderson - What's up? 21:59, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

That's right. For the moment you've lost the community's confidence that you can really do anything that requires responsibility. It's not just about your refusing to stop clerking admin areas - what you have demonstrated is that you don't follow advice in general, so you're not in a position to give any to anyone else. Do take Worm's advice and don't be impatient to want to take on tasks that you are not ready for. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:06, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

How long do you think i should wait before seeing if i can be an instructor?--Anderson - What's up? 22:17, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

At least six months if not longer - or even wait until you are older. Best to put the idea completely out of your head until then. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:44, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I said Here that i am going to follow the plan left on my TP.--Anderson - What's up? 23:05, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

So follow it then, and don't keep asking questions about what you have already been told and already know, or you'll soon find yourself getting no help or advice from anybody at all.. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:13, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I apologize for the same. Never thought it would become so messy. Harsh (talk) 06:34, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi,

I am currently reviewing an entry for Dr. Andrew Michta who is my superior at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. He wrote to me recently asking to update his Wikipedia entry as it requires an update. I wrote his new bio and received a photograph i would like to upload.

I understand that if you grant me the access and upgrade with "autoconfirmed" status, I will be able to finish the document.

His original message to me:

Original Message-----

From: Andrew Michta Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 6:16 PM To: Jacob Foreman Subject: Wiki photo

Jacob I sent you a photo for the wiki page. Could you pls upload to the existing entry. I will forward you the revised entry shortly. Thx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foreman2005 (talk • contribs) 14:19, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Please watch for an administrator's decision on the WP:PERM page. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:54, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, How does one determine another users sufficient counter vandalism activity when they request rollback rights please? Thanks --JetBlast (talk) 18:51, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

It's assessed by looking at the overall number of edits, the number of correct vs. incorrect manual counter-vandalism reverts. However, an admin's decision to grant the tool is also .based on many other criteria. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:03, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello Kudpung. I read that you were willing to consider nominating editors for adminship. I tried an editor review, but a few weeks later, nothing has happened and I considered self-nominating my self for RFA with the intention of getting some feedback/constructive criticism, but I felt like that was somewhat disingenuous so I decided to ask a user willing to consider nominating people for RFA. I know right off the bat my edit count is low, but recently (the past month or so) I have gotten much more involved and hope to stay that way. So if you wouldn't mind taking a minute to give me some feedback, I would really appreciate it. Thanks in advance. Go Phightins! (talk) 03:25, 8 September 2012 (UTC) (I'm watching your page so no need for talkback)

Good morning. I'm looking into this for you. In the meantime check this out and see how you fare, and read WP:Advice for RfA candidates and follow all the links in the article and its footnotes. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:07, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I've done a few quick checks of your editing history. If you have followed the links I gave you above and read everything meticulously, I'm sure you will understand why you will not be ready for adminship any time yet. Running for adminship just to obtain feedback would be see in very bad light and may compromise a future run. You'll probably find also that you have not really made enough contributions yet for anyone to be able to apply any metrics to your editor review. I would suggest that you read our policies on article creation, especially WP:N, and if you read WP:NPP carefully and WP:DELETION, you may wish to help out on new page patrol, but stay away from any contentious maintenance and admin areas until you have a lot more experience. You might also like to check out the work that the people do at the CVU, and if you get good enough at it you may be able to apply for Rollback rights. If you need help or advice at any time, don't hesitate to ask me. Happy editing! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:29, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I read the advice before asking you, and that's exactly why I didn't self-nom...I've been doing NPP for a few months now. I'll check out the counter-vandalism unit, wasn't familiar with it. Thanks. Go Phightins! (talk) 10:12, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Redundant butting-in, no doubt: many editors at RfA require significant article creation and contribution. Just patrolling, even if someone has done a lot of it, is rarely considered enough. Good luck. (And: hey Kudpung, how you doing?) Drmies (talk) 23:32, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Fine thanks :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:25, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

I've added a request there, But there has been no activity there since then except for the archiving. Could you take a look Please?--Calm As Midnight 03:31, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. There is absolutely no urgency for having the use of the tools that are granted at PERM. You can rest assured that plenty of admins have those pages on their watch lists and will get around to it soon. Remember also that a great many active admins live in very different time zones across the globe - me for example ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:41, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung,

Regarding this comment by an IP, I'm concerned Anderson is clerking by editing anonymously. Could you look into this matter? Cheers, --Calm As Midnight 21:33, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Anderson got himself blocked by using that IP to clerk at the admin areas.--Calm As Midnight 21:59, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I think the new ANI it totally supefluos and should be closed to save wasting more admin time and attracting unnecessary comments to the board from univolved non admins. There's also a new issue that I will expose later. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:34, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree. this issue is going too far.--Calm As Midnight 23:38, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Forgive me for saying so, but with only 200 edits, I think you should stay out of it (and all admin areas) unless you are directly involved - that kind of messing around is what got Anderson where he is now. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:44, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I'll start contributing around these areas when i've been here for about 6 months.--Calm As Midnight 23:53, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Please also stay away from page patrolling until you have read WP:NPP and WP:DELETION and fully understood them. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:58, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Note that the above user is a checkuser-confirmed sock of Anderson himself. Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:17, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

I know, I know :) and there's more to come. Just hang on. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:36, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Scottdelaney1067. I don't know if the CU will accept this, but I feel a sock report should go on record. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:02, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

OK, well it's at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Anderson. Looks like someone else had a quicker connection than mine although mine was more detailed and listed the sockmaster. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:42, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User page breaching wikipedia policies, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Timeshift9 (2nd nomination). Cunard (talk) 06:11, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | The Admin's Barnstar |- |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | What an outstanding admin! Yeknom Dnalsli (expound your voicebox here) 09:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC) |} Wow! Thanks! What on earth did I do to deserve it? :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:57, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

You deserve it because...well the barnstar explains it. Yeknom Dnalsli (expound your voicebox here) 09:59, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Barnstars from sockpuppets are worthless. Blocked. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:51, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung,
For starters, yep, I am very well aware that I should be editing en.wp's core content rather than hanging round at WP:NPP. That said, I've found a little niche there. I'm often frustrated with WP:CSD tagging for articles that don't meet the CSD criteria. I've looked all over the place, but can't find a specific policy or guideline that allows non-admins to decline CSDs. (Apart from Wikipedia:Ignore all rules of course, which I think should be re-named "Wikipedia:Ignore one rule".)
Could you possibly point me to a policy or guideline that may cover non-admin speedy deletion declines? --Shirt58 (talk) 11:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Any editor in good standing can remove an incorrectly applied CSD tag and/or change the criterion, and warn the patroller. That's why those functions are available to all users in Twinkle with a CSD-Decline template in the drop down Twinkle menu and warning messages. There's no need to cite a policy because there probably isn't one, but you might like to check out WP:DELETION and WP:CSD to save me looking for you . Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:01, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Non-admins may contest speedy deletions that are done improperly. At the end of the day, a CSD tag is just a template, although it may have bigger ramifications. Twinkle doesn't always mark the page as patrolled, so I take a look at it, and on occasion, when I find an incorrect CSD tag, I'll contest it using the CSD Helper Script. Hope this helped, Electric Catfish 00:10, 10 September 2012 (UTC).

In some circumstances, I could easily envision myself replacing a CSD tag - lets say A7 - with a PROD tag, or even nominating it for deletion at AfD. CSD-A7 is only for articles on living beings (i.e. individual people or animals), organizations, or web content where there is no assertion of notability whatsoever. If notability is asserted but the claims are not credible, and there are no reliable sources backing them up (this excludes self-published sources), then I would be inclined to add a PROD tag on the basis that I highly doubt it would survive AfD. Then of course, there are new articles in which notability is asserted, there are reliable sources, but someone still slaps a CSD tag on it. I'd be bold and remove it because it clearly does meet the threshold for an acceptable article, at least on face value (whether it would survive at AfD, who knows until it's nominated). Kurtis (talk) 01:47, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

This discussion is now closed. Thanks everyone for your input. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Could you please permanently semi-protect it? I do not wish another incident like this to occur again. Cheers! Rory ^Talk 13:16, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Rory ^Talk 13:20, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Done. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:21, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey all :). We've just deployed another set of features for Page Curation. They include flyouts from the icons in Special:NewPagesFeed, showing who reviewed an article and when, a listing of this in the "info" flyout, and a general re-jigging of the info flyout - we've also fixed the weird bug with page_titles_having_underscores_instead_of_spaces in messages sent to talkpages, and introduced CSD logging! As always, these features will need some work - but any feedback would be most welcome. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:20, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the collapsebox tip! Dan653 (talk) 19:58, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Please do not leave notice after notice on my talk page please. Spend your time here usefully. Intoronto1125Talk Contributions 04:30, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I appear to be not the only editor or admin who has expressed concerns about your tagging of new pages. Please spend your time here usefully, adopt a modicum of civility, and consider refraining from patrolling pages until you can demonstrate that you can do it with fewer errors.In extreme cases, persistent wrong tagging can be considered disruptive editing. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:41, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)This reminds me of my first trip to ANI. I used an edit summary like this and instead of a peaceful talk page discussion I got a chastising at ANI. In short, assume that when an admin posts on your talk page repeatedly, assume they have a good reason to, because they're trying to help you.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:49, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

From the editor: Signpost adapts as news consumption changes

Op-ed: Fixing Wikipedia's help pages one key to editor retention

In the media: Author criticizes Wikipedia article; Wales attacks UK government proposal

Featured content: Not a "Gangsta's Paradise", but still rappin'

WikiProject report: WikiProject Fungi

Special report: Two Wikipedians set to face jury trial

News and notes: Researchers find that Simple English Wikipedia has "lost its focus"

Technology report: Mmmm, milkshake...

Discussion report: Closing Wikiquette; Image Filter; Education Program and Momento extensions

Read this Signpost in full
Single-page
Unsubscribe
EdwardsBot (talk) 05:16, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	A small token of appreciation for your continuing diligent and accurate work at WP:PERM. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:44, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Yunsh. Much appreciated. You don't do too bad there yourself :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:09, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung, unsourced content continues to be inserted into Sibichen K Mathew from multiple IPs despite several reversions and warnings. Could you please take a look. Thanks Sesamevoila (talk) 11:41, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I've semi protected the page for a week. You will only have to contend with any registered users. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:08, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up at RFPP. I couldn't make heads or tails of what was going on there (I didn't see how it was vandalism at all), but a little digging showed that the IPs were running amok on that and several other articles. The editors continually reverting them weren't helping matters at all, so I just took the article to RFPP and the IPs to AIV. If I felt like I knew a little more of the background, I would have just taken the whole lot to ANEW. As it is, at least one of the confirmed accounts involved ended up at ANEW anyway (IIRC). Thanks again, cheers! --Tgeairn (talk) 03:35, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung. I know you're against non-admin observations at PERM, and was wondering if this decline for reviewer from a non-admin is considered appropriate? Obviously, the user shouldn't have the right, but I didn't know non-admins were allowed to deny requests. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello, TRLIJC19. Non-admins may close permission requests, just like AfD's. I usually stay away from clerking, and frown upon it when others do it but when it is a request from a user with 14 mainspace edits, I think it is appropriate to decline the request. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley _talk 03:55, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) :In my opinion, non admin closures are not appropriate, even if logically valid. Such work is often attributed to a kind of hat-collection by aspiring RfA candidates (it will show as edits to PERM on their edit count breakdown). I have tried many times to do something about it but without success. The only thing I can do is to get in first with admin closures, which is the reason why I have been working on PERM for the past few weeks. However, I can't be online 24/24, and there is only a handful of admins that watch the PERM pages. That said, no requests are ever urgent, and there is no need (again in my opinion)for this kind of 'clerking'. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I will just add that masquerading as admins will even seriously compromise a user's eventual request for adminship. In order not to confuse new editors into believing that such comments come from admins, if at all necessary (and in most cases they are not), good faith non admin comments should contain a mention that the user is not an admin. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:41, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Of all people I thought you would know I am not aspiring RfA candidate ;), anyways, I won't "clerk" if that is what you would like. :) -- Cheers, Riley Huntley _talk 14:35, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

That was one of my famous generalisations Riley - but you could remember to add NAC or NAO ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:51, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

{{you've got mail}}. No tb needed, I watch my friends. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley _talk 15:09, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung, I noticed a comment you made on the Innocence of Muslims request and I just had a quick question about it. You mentioned that "any editor in good standing with sufficient neutral subject knowledge can revert to a stable version", I was just wondering if this was through making an edit request on the talk page, or if there was something else I haven't discovered yet? Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:12, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I am concerned that the socks may have sleepers, but it's not possible to do a full-protect followed by a semi in one go, which would have been ideal here. Edit requests should be made to restore to a stable version, and when that expires, any editors in good standing can continue to revert and warn users and make new PP requests if the disruption continues, and/or report users to an appropriate noticeboard. Continued vigilance is required to detect new socks on this highly controversial article. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:30, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Right I see what you mean now, thanks. Just a quick note, I wasn't questioning your action, just what you meant by reverting to a stable version. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:59, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand that either. Also, where do you see the allegations of socks? There was only a request for semi-protection at RFPP and I don't see any evidence of any substantial edit warring or anything else which might show socks in the history. I'm guessing that maybe you wanted to pick semi-protection instead of full protection, since you also suggested that any editor in good standing can revert. However, I happen to agree that the article should be fully protected, because people have been trying to revert certain information away from a related article which I think is essential. But I might ask that you reduce from 3 days down to 1 or 2? —Cupco 05:29, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict):::My take at WP:RFPP is that in order to prevent further disruption relative urgency is often required to act on a request. Too many RFPP requests expect the admins to review 100s of edits and asses which ones are right and which ones are wrong. What we sometimes do is revert to what we feel is a stable version before the recent trouble started, but unfortunately, not being experts on the subject matter, this is often not possible. The actual clean up relys on the due diligence of the article's regular good faith editors. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:34, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I see. In that case you might want to keep an eye on the {{editprotected}}s (3 so far) at the bottom of Talk:Innocence of Muslims. —Cupco 05:36, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

When I intervene to protect a page, I become WP:INVOLVED - I have a very conservative interpretation as to what I may or may not do as an admin. I therefore do not adjudicate on the accuracy of the requested edits; I leave that up to non involved admins. However, in deference to the fact that the article was only recently created, I have reduced the FPP to 1 day. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:50, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, I think that will work out very well in this case. The news organizations have been interviewing the actors and actresses who have made a joint statement. With luck all of their reports will be checked and published by 24 hours from your protection. —Cupco 05:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

You may wish also to check (as I had) just how many contributors have already been blocked, and how many of the IPs stem from the same range. You may well find that any future IPs and new accounts that are created to edit this article may already have a Wikipedia history. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:10, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

	The Admin's Barnstar
	I came online this morning to find this request on my talkpage: by the time I got to RPP you had already performed the Herculean task of clearing the backlog all by yourself! Sterling work, sir; I salute you once again. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:39, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Well thank you! I guess it was just a time zone thing. I'm still also trying to get in quick enough at PERM to stave off the superfluous non admin clerking and closing. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Good day. Instead of simply criticizing, you might take a minute to notice that I spend a great deal of time working on articles to assist editors. I often also provide help at their talk pages and welcome them with information about the various links they might find helpful. The only submissions I decline quickly are as follows: blank pages, pages not in English, pages without any references at all, advertisements, nonsense pages of people who write single lines boasting about the prowess, good looks, best friend, etc., pages that read like diary entries etc. Rather than leave a braod, non-specific criticism on my talk page, it would be more constructive if you were specific. If you feel I have improperly or unfairly declined an article, please advise me the name(s) of those articles and I will undo my decline. If you are simply referring to the one instance where a partial sentence submitted as an article alerted you to the fact that writer was actually asking for assistance regarding their status, as I have already indicated, that wasn't clear at all to me or I would have assisted as I always do when asked. Have a terrific day. Snowysusan 10:12, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I am known for being sometimes blunt, while nevertheless always polite and helpful. I spend a lot of my time helping new users where others can't be bothered to. AfC, like NPP, the CVUA, and a few other maintenance areas, is largely staffed by new and inexperienced users themselves, so I don't always take the time to wade through all their edits to see if they are getting it right. That said I have over 10,000 articles on my watchlist and another 7,000 user talk pages. I have now randomly checked some of your AfC declines and find you are doing a reasonably good job, but the issue with TruePepito still stands as a 'criticism' because it was obvious. You may also wish to correctly format your signature with links to your user and talk page - especially where you are doing a job where many people may wish to reply to you and/or find out more about you. Have a nice day, and if you ever need help or advice, don't hesitate to ask me here. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung,
You had recently denied reviewer rights when I had applied, and also advised that I do more more vandalism before I could apply again and also apply for rollback. Do you think I can apply for rollback now. I din't apply because, when I view the diff, I already get a rollback option. Please advise. Thanks!
tausif(talk) 12:13, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Done Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:37, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks :) tausif(talk) 12:52, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi,
I wanted to know whether I can rename a file at the commons for the reason Disambiguate? The auto-script doesn't provide that option. So can i manually edit the page with {{rename media}} and give the reason as #7-Disambiguate? I asked this to SvenManguard but he isn't online. ThanksHarsh (talk) 15:49, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

It all depends on the file/name, really. As you observed, to add a custom reason you cannot use the script, it must be done manually. On commons, criterion #7 is not the same as criterion #7 on Wikipedia, so don't add "#7" because it will probably be rejected because criterion #7 does not apply to the image. Could I please know the file name? If the request seems appropriate, I will move it. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley _talk 18:49, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Riley, Thank you very much. But I just had come across a file in commons, and then I just left it, without bookmarking it...so I don't know the file name. Thanks for the help

Harsh (talk) 19:07, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

why did you delets voles airlines. i'm only 8 years old — Preceding unsigned comment added by Love2puddings (talk • contribs) 01:41, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Love2Puddings. Voles airlines was deleted because we couldn't find any proof that it exists - we don't include articles about made up stuff. I sent you a message over a month ago suggesting you improve the article to avoid it being deleted but you didn't reply. We then did some checking and found that it was not about a real airline at all. Wikipedia can be a difficult place to write articles for - that's why it's usually done by grownups. If you have an idea for an article, why not talk to me about it first? I would hate to see you waste your time on an article that will get deleted again. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:09, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Please also see WP: YOUNG. Electric Catfish 17:06, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I just saw your question. It was not a casuality. As you could see, the date of the gathering was the same own day than the war of edits, which started a fight for cyphers since a political side claimed 2 million people had asisted and the other claimed they had been less than 500,000 people. Then both sides started using the article to mock the other political side, and were posting it on blogs, websites, etc. I tried to protect it (by undoing edits and by asking for protection) since I was afraid the war could affect other, more important and realistic entries. 85.219.58.184 (talk) 19:09, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:02, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not understanding why my contribution (the only contribution) for that None More Black demo got deleted. I know it wasn't sited, there was nowhere i could cite it from, i wrote from knowledge. It seems like you deleted it or got it deleted, can i please be told what i screwed up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RingAnimated (talk • contribs) 23:35, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Are you talking about something that happened over three months ago? Please refer to any comments or messages on your talk page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:52, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi I wondered if you could move a page for me it is only a very minor move it is Stagecoach Southwest to Stagecoach South West. Mark999 (talk) 04:31, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Done. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:42, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung, I replied to both messages on my talk page. Since you're message asked that I reply here I'll leave this instead. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:20, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I've replied to the first one (on MySpace). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:54, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the messages about NPP, and talking about it with me. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:45, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Which section do you think I ought to comment on? As I do believe I have commented on most of them, why the TB on my talk page? Darkness Shines (talk) 10:00, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I sent that talkback to everyone as a FYI who had recently edited the article whether they were involved in the edit warring and POV pushing or not. I have no opinions on the content, but I am concerned that the article should be neutral and that all content be adequately sourced. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:08, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello Kudpung, if you get a chance could you advise in this case, possibly by sending me a copy of the deleted article if permitted? There is a problem in general with CSD cat G4 as non-admins cannot see the deleted content therefore have to make educated guesses about it. I rarely nominate under that criteria but in this case it seemed relevant as all the sources in question were very dodgy ones often related to the subject or were IMDB style. Thanks, Valenciano (talk) 23:36, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

This article is not deleted yet. It is not identical and is more complete than the 2008 version that was deleted for lack of solid references. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:23, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

As an admin with a keen interest in education-related articles, perhaps you might take a look at Rajatkalia‎ (talk · contribs) and some of the articles he has been editing recently. I'm stepping back because I don't want to trip 3RR, but he needs to be reigned in. --Biker Biker (talk) 09:29, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Replied on your tp. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:48, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi,
Sorry for troubling you for this petty issue and believe me I have no urgency, but my request at WP:RFP/RV is pending since 7 days. I am only concerned since all the requests that were posted after mine were answered and archived. I was just wondering whats wrong. Harsh (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

The new PC hasn't been deployed yet so actual role for Reviewers hasn't been clarified and are still under discussion. I asked for a moratorium on according reviewer rights, so while other admi,ns may occasionally watch the page, I don't review the requests there. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:01, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Is it not true that the trial PC will commence from December 1 ? Harsh (talk) 09:43, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

AFAIK, they are still drafting the proposals for an RfC for the community to decide hiow it will deployed. if I have understood correctly, if they haven't reached a consensus by then, the PC will go ahead as per the default suggested in the RfC to implement it. The discussion(s) is/are such a mess (for me anyway) I gave up following them. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:11, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Can you explain me one flaw with PC being the reason for which it wasn't extended to more articles. I mean it is so much better than semi-protection. And why wasn't there any proposal to merge the reviewer rights of editors with rollbackers, because rollbackers already understand vandalism and they can review the pages they are concerned with. Harsh (talk) 10:39, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

To be absolutely honest, the first deployment of PC a couple of years ago was highly controversial. In fact around 5,000 'Reviewer' accounts were created simply by a bot. I woke up one morning to find I was a Reviewer (in the days long before I became an admin) and didn't have the foggiest idea what it was all about. To this day, I reserve my opinion on the merits of PC, and will simply implement any rules (as an admin) that I will be expected to do. For the last two years or more I have been more concerned with the lack of control over who can patrol new pages which needs a far greater level of experience and knowledge of policy than any of these minor rights. Part of my work contributed to getting a new NPP feed developed and rewriting the WP:NPP page into a kind of tutorial. There is also the problem that these minor rights are clearly seen as trophies by many rather than simply a job to be done like NPP (which doesn't give the users a badge to wear). Having partly followed some of the discussions, there appears to be some distinction between Rollbacker and Reviewer, but as the opinions are mixed, I can't characterise on it. What I would would like to see in the future would be a right that combines Rollbacker, Reviewer, and NPPer all in one, and with some minimum criteria for experience for it. Naturally the hat-collectors would object and vote it down though. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:58, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that is so true. But then, why you don't start some discussion in village pump. I think Rollback+Reviewer+NPP into one right with some added min criteria will be supported. Harsh (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

You've probably noticed that I'm a very busy admin and I can't do everything at once! While the WMF has taken on the role of developing NPP solutions, I am a mere unpaid volunteer ;) What you have suggested however, is already on the cards and drafted, but I will wait until the outcome of PC is settled, and seen it working for a while, and seen what happens when we get the CVUA problems sorted out. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:25, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

"Naturally the hat-collectors would object and vote it down though" ... actually, I'm not so sure they would. After all, it would be a new style of hat (albeit just a combination of three existing hats), and if there's one thing hat-collectors love, it's new hats! Even if you laid down a set of minimum requirements to get it, one suspects the first thing they would be thinking, is how to edit in order to meet those requirements. Or, how to persuade you to reduce the requirements so that it could be potentially within their reach. Not how to vote down the proposal. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 11:44, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Hahah...I agree. if there's one thing hat-collectors love, it's new hats!

. Harsh (talk) 11:49, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict):::Valid points, Demiurge. What I am privy to, however, are the free comments boxes in the NPP survey I initiated a year ago. Among the 3,000 or so respondents, the answers to neutrally phrased questions were split 50/50 for and against a user right for NPP. Interestingly, the reasons either way were varied. Some said we have enough user rights already - which is understandable, while some simply argued that because WP is the 'pedia anyione can edit, it should be the one anyone can 'unedit'. Among those who were for an NPP right, were users who suggested that maturity and experience are required for the task and that some control should be introduced, while others appeared to welcome the thought of yet another hat to collect. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:57, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Introducing a new right would obviously create a problem, but merging all powers of three rights into one might not. Harsh (talk) 12:07, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Which not only would introduce some economy of work for the two or thee admins who regulalry watch the PERM pages, but also, if the bar were high enough, assure some quality. Demiurge is on the ball with 'one suspects the first thing they would be thinking, is how to edit in order to meet those requirements' - which is a poignant reality I'm well aware of as I've seen with all my chasing of the 100-edits newbies away from 'clerking' admin areas, but if we are able to sort the wheat from the chaff, some good may come of it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:22, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure that rollbacker and possible NPPer should be the same right? There quite different. --Mysterytrey 22:42, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I think that sent the wrong message. I wish I'd seen it before it was closed but I was away. This was not acceptable behavior. Not linking accounts clearly, signing with a name that isn't the account name, implying that the account has Admin tools, not making it clear that those tools are in abeyance, etc. I'm off to bed now but may open a new section tomorrow. Dougweller (talk) 20:52, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Doug. Don't hesitate to reopen it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:53, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

This is a bit odd? Why would someone start a page with a speedy deletion template on it? Electric Catfish 21:04, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

When that happens, check the log for the page. This one had just been speedy deleted and the author recreated it. Ryan Vesey 21:07, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's almost always the case. Recreated usually as a copy past from an older version either stored locally by the creator before it was deleted, or taken from a search engine cache. Something I've always been meaning to include in the WP:NPP tutorial and never got round to. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:57, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed you have helped reduced the duration of User:173.63.176.93's block because of reasons that I cannot see. However, I assume it has something to do with his involvement with Yosemite National Park's Talk Page. Recently, I have also tried to add a section acknowledging its the Hantavirus Risk in Yosemite National Park, but my edit was similarly dismissed by User:Jojhutton. If the mention of deaths is the issue, then I believe we can include the information without directly mentioning the deaths.

I have written a new draft of this edit in one of my subpages: User:Airelor/Yosemite_National_Park.

Please take a look and suggest any other edits or make any changes as you see fit before I try to add it to the main Yosemite_National_Park page. If you know of any administrators or Wikipedia Users you can refer this draft (or me) specifically to for advice about this matter, that would be very appreciated too. Thank you. Airelor (talk) 21:42, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not in a position to comment on the content of that article except that all controversal content must be reliably sourced, and that no undue weight in articles should be lent to either positive or negative aspects of the subject. I don't see where any of your contributions have been reverted recently. The best way to go is to continue discussion on the talk page and if that fails, take the issue to WP:DRN. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:11, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

More information This discussion is closed. Please do not modify or add it. ...

This discussion is closed. Please do not modify or add it.

Please that a look at this: User talk:Walrasiad#Warning. Also here: User talk:Cambalachero#Good to know that somethings never change and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Lecen

Most importantly, he's been blocked before: User talk:Lecen/Archive 12#January 2012 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=noticeboard&prefix=User+talk%3ALecen%2F&fulltext=Search+archives&fulltext=Search

Look at the tone and the threats Lecen has been up to. Nothing justifies that kind of threat, not even if he happened to be right. I was taking a look through his talk page archives, and he has a huge record of trolling like that and has reported other users to the Administrator's Noticeboard due to edit conflicts in the past. I was going to post a complaint myself, but decided to inform you first.

For how long do we have to tolerate bullies like that? I. N. Keller (talk) 22:52, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

I've checked the links you provided but there's nothing I can do about it here. If you feel you have a case that may justify admin action on current or recent issues, the place to take it is WP:AN/I, but note that citing very old issues probably won't cut ice. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:21, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh well. I'm not sure I can be bothered, really. But he *is* very unscrupulous. His kind is very common in the Portuguese Wikipedia - older users who revert newcomers's contributions and refuse to discuss it; if you try to get attention, they report you to other administrators or block you themselves (my first few contributions there, a few years ago, were all reversed and they refused to even answer my posts in the talk pages, so I left after only a week). I remember seeing a news piece on the technology section of a big news website about how that was the reason the pt.wiki was losing contributors. I hope the same is not happening to the English Wikipedia.

Thanks and sorry for disturbing you again. I. N. Keller (talk) 01:35, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Kudpung. I've not quite figured out who Imnotkeller is/was, but they are obviously a returning editor trolling Lecen; an SPA "wise" beyond the 49 edits on this account. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 03:29, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

We have many editors who appear to be 'wise beyond their years'. It may be someone who edited for a long time (as I did) as an IP before registering. I think you'll have to AGF on this until you find some reasonably conclusive evidence to the contrary. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:58, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Ah, AGF; enabling the disruptive for years. There's still the SPA contrib history and the apparent collusion of the same folks badgering Lecen on all manner of requested moves in South America (and Portugal;) concerning Portuguese/Spanish (and Anglicisation of) terms. There's a history of socks in those discussions, too. FYI, I'm only using one account in there ;> Br'er Rabbit (talk) 04:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

As I said, if you have sufficient evidence, feel free to take it to the appropriate noticeboard, but you'll need to provide diffs. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:37, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I have, indeed, been editing Wikipedia since at least 2005 (probably before that), and have even made some mid to large-sized contributions, mostly as an IP address. I've also had a few accounts whose names and passwords I have long forgotten, as I will surely forget this one not long from now. So do take one suggestion from me: don't waste your time, I won't care at all if this account is blocked. In fact, I haven't stopped editing as an IP address, I use proxies (semi-private ones), and I have internet access at more than one location where I live (including public hostpots and some of my computer-illiterate neighboors's open ones); my home IP is also dynamic, in case you're wondering. Despite all that, I have never vandalised a single letter on Wikipedia, and have even reverted vandalism. And, please, Rabbit, if you want to troll, feel free to do it at my talk page (it's not like I ever look at it, anyway), it's very rude to keep pestering poor Kudpung - I've pestered him enough already. Go back to 4chan. I. N. Keller (talk) 05:06, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Who's a troll? ;> Br'er Rabbit (talk) 05:18, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Close

see Stonedwolf comment. Johnbod (talk) 15:25, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Not me, been a musician all my life, and I know nothing about French history at all. Never heard of the article either. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I wonder who then - you seemed to fit the description pretty well. Johnbod (talk) 22:36, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Probably a synthesis from what they remember. The only bit that matches is the retired academic in Thailand. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:49, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

No doubt. I can't see where his edits were, not that I've sdone much of a search. Johnbod (talk) 22:56, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi,
Recently you gave me rollback rights. I have been rolling back couple vandalisms. Please let me know, if am not doing a good job.
tausif(talk) 15:36, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

From the editor: Signpost expands to Facebook

WikiProject report: Action! — The Indian Cinema Task Force

Featured content: Go into the light

News and notes: Tens of thousands of monuments loved; members of new funding body announced

Technology report: Future-proofing: HTML5 and IPv6

Read this Signpost in full
Single-page
Unsubscribe
EdwardsBot (talk) 16:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung! I love your suggestion the new CV School and I hope the rest of the CVUAers agree. I think that recruiting more admins for the CVUA would be quite beneficial and keep the project on the right foot. Here is an odd hoax I caught on NPP tonight - I never knew that there was an impending crisis in Africa! Best, Electric Catfish 00:57, 19 September 2012 (UTC).

Whether the CVUers agree or not, except for a reformatted home page and a rather good, summarised syllabus, the main underlying issues have not been addressed. Issues with students and instructors continue to arise, while the social 'clerking' with all its mini templates continues up to a few hours ago. Projects are not owned - even by the listed project members. The consent by the CVUers is not required for a change. More than sufficient concerns have been expressed by mature experienced users and admins and any changes will probably be made per WP:BRD. One 'coordinator' has apparently already resigned. My draft proposal puts everything on one page and requires neither clerks, coordinators, bureaucracy, heirarchy, nor the use of dozens of miniature templates and micro discussions. Hopefully this will also lead to a drop in premature requests for user rights and unnecessary clerking of admin areas. In my opinion, it would be better to adopt the new proposal than to risk the CVUA being closed down completely or merged to another mentoring program where it would add confusion, dilute the efficiency, and risk again being controlled by users who may not have sufficient experience or maturity for project management. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:23, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I've been more involved in WP: UMPIRE, a project that focuses on content recently. There is no bureaucracy and there are no coordinators, although one of our members successfully nominated another member for adminship recently. They also convinced me to write my first article. Umpires articles receive much vandalism, so we are considering setting up an Umpires patrol as part of the task force. We also hope to bring Joe West (umpire) or Jim Joyce to GA status, as well as getting a DYK for Chris Conroy (one of my first articles). I'd like to add some things to the syllabus section of the CV School draft, so do I have permission to edit it? Thanks, Electric Catfish 16:54, 19 September 2012 (UTC).

I am very concerned that the page should stay as short as possible. I even believe I have left too much text in it. You can edit it, but I may revert it if I think it is not appropriate. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:01, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

All I have to say is for someone who said that he would stay out of the CVUA he seems extremly involved. The current trial was started because of you and we decided it was best to trial the system. But, about halfway through the trial, when you said "dans comment pretty much sums it up, there is no accountability" that was because of you because you said we should do away with all requirements. During the trial Vert had the great idea to have a curriclum, which we would have implemented too. Also, was anyone really thinking about closing down the CVUA or is that just a scaretactic? Ultimately, all this led to a total restructure of the project from someone, who said he wasn't going to be there. Dan653 (talk) 23:05, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

More information Closed - again. I don't want to see this petty squabble continued on my talk page. Noticeboards are thataway → ...

Closed - again. I don't want to see this petty squabble continued on my talk page. Noticeboards are thataway →

Hello, there. I'm Lecen, a.k.a. "the Evil one" according to someone above. I'd like to request you to talk to Imnotkeller and stop him from insulting me and the other users who have opposed the move request. This is not acceptable and neither is calling us "trolls". Also, this kind of reply is also unhelpful. You will notice that I made two or three comments at most on the discussion on that talk page. None of them directed to Imnotkeller. Please, talk to him and warn him that there are better ways to deal with other users. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 09:52, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but my talk page is not part of the dispute resolution department and I have marked the previous discussion as closed. If you have concerns about another user please take it to an appropriate noticeboard. Remember that any user is perfectly entitled to officially warn another user. After attempts at discussion and a correct number of warnings without result, then escalate, but I would advise however against going to WP:AN/I unless you have a complaint that clearly requires admin action and can be supported by diffs which you should list. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I would have gone to the ANI if I wanted to see him blocked, which isn't the case. I believe blocks should be carried on as last resorts. What I asked you, since he chose you as somekind of mediator, was to remind him that he should focus on content, not on an editor. --Lecen (talk) 10:31, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I have repeatedly given everyone the same response: take the complaints to a noticeboard. Please understand that this is now closed as far as I am concerned. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:37, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

He already did. In fact, reporting me to ANI was the very first thing he did, a few hours after my edit and before even joining the discussion in the talk page. I. N. Keller (talk) 10:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm closing this again. Please take your petty squabbles elsewhere. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:48, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Close

Thanks for your guidance - My apologies, I said new pages, when I should have said unique pages. I was impressed that this user often made very large edits of a good quantity, rather than the few words many editors add at a time (myself included). I had consulted [Wikipedia:Autopatrolled]]. I do see your points as valid, and now see that Galaxycat needs to do more work - and in particular more quoting of reliable sources. I hope this comes to Galaxycat's attention, so he/she can learn, as I have from your feedback. Simuliid talk 12:13, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung--

It took me a little longer than I thought, but I did open up an RfC on the proposal and have also posted it to relevant parts of the village pump. I welcome your participation whenever you are able. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 00:04, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Kudpung, may I ask your comments on an AfD claim? It is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2012_September_20#Salty_Fingers_.28plant.29 Regards, Akolyth (talk)

I'm not going to vote on that AfD bbut here's my take on the sources:

http://trademark.markify.com/trademarks/ctm/salty+fingers/010225423 Reliable. Confirms the name but does not add to notability
http://sauceobsessive.blogspot.de/2012/02/fci-demo-from-sandro-romano-chef-de.html Personal blog. Not a reliable source. Fleeting mention and a photo.
http://centraleurope.koppertcress.com/en/content/salty-fingers Possibly reliable. Not sure if this kind of website adds to notability.
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/f-a-z-gourmetvison-die-rueckkehr-der-ente-11592344.html Newspaper. i'm a bilingual English-German speaker but I can't find any mention of it amongst all this Feinschmekerei.
http://www.gourmetglobe.de/kolumnen/tempel-on-tour/1241-eine-neue-schoepfung-kohlund-zier-und-elverfeld-auf-sylt.html Possibly a mainstream gastronomy publication., but I don't see what it has to do with the subject. Only a very fleeting mention of Salty Fingers.
http://www.papillesetpupilles.fr/2012/08/salty-fingers.html/ French recipe site. Author believes 'Salty Fingers' are German words. Not sure if such sites assert notability for a plant without any taxonomic data.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:51, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your remarks. As regards the references, I have added a few new referencess but you may have overlooked the mentioning of ssalty Fingers in FAZ (if you use the search function). What it simply shows is, that recipes containing Salty Fingers are being used and discussed even by the most distinguished newspapers. Regards, Akolyth (talk) 12:23, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	While it's not over yet, I'd like to thank you for your hard with the wp:CVUA reform -- it's very appreciated! Theo polisme 10:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Kudpung, thank you so much for all of your effort at the CVUA. It's much appreciated. Electric Catfish² 18:16, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung. Could you take a quick look at the discussion on Talk:Peter Schiff and add your perspective?

At issue is the following phrase: "Krugman quoted Schiff from December 2009 as stating:" Previously, the article read as "Krugman quoted and referred to the following statement by Schiff from December, 2009:"

SPECIFICO believes the revised phrase may be interpreted as Krugman attributing an unsourced idea to Schiff whereas I do not see this implication. On the otherhand, I see the phrase "quoted and referred to" as redundant phrasing.

This is the major issue I would like to have feedback on; if it is not too much trouble, I would appreciate if you could give feedback on the usage of "Keynesian" in the context of the article.

Thanks! K♪monkey@('_')@ _Talk⇉✌ 20:22, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I understand your dilemma, but the best place to ask for impartial advice would be at a noticeboard such as WP:3O. That said, whatever the choice of language by Wkipedia editors, any quotations should either be reported accurately and of course be perfectly referenced or left out altogether. Having looked a the talk page discussion however, perhaps if it continues on its current polite lines, you may be able to resolve this among yourselves. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:54, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. K♪monkey@('_')@ _Talk⇉✌ 01:22, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi - you offered to help with research on the "philosophy and sociology" of Wikipedia. I would be very interested in taking you up on this. Would you like to take it forward? Hestiaea (talk) 07:10, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes. Just tell me how and I'll see what I can do. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:27, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Is emailing you OK?Hestiaea (talk) 08:11, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Certainly. And I would then also let you have my Skype name if you would like to chat. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:14, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand Skype at all, or Twitter. I will email you after breakfast, if that's OK. My timezone is London. Hestiaea (talk) 08:28, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I woun't dream opf using Twitter. never used it, and never will. Skype is extremely easy and even easier to set up than most of those awful social networking sites. Send me an email after your breakfast. It's just after lunchtime here. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:32, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, thanks. Probably later in the week - it's beginning of term and I am taking daughter to first day at college shortly. Thanks for the interest. I'll enquire about Skype, if it's as easy as you say. Hestiaea (talk) 09:30, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Email is also fine :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:33, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Not trying to second guess you, but was it your intention to protect the talk page at the above article and not the article? Cause the red linkers are tearing it up at this moment and I do not know where to begin to straighten it out. Gtwfan52 (talk) 05:23, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

That was my error. After reading the talk page I thought I had gone back to the article when I did the semi protection. I have now reverted the article to this diff hich I belive was the last stable version, and Full protected it for 24 hours. let me know what happens, bcause a full protect can't be kept on for long. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I haven't much time, but there is another experienced editor on it too. Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:09, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Remember that for the next 24 hours only admins can edit it. This might make the others give up. Unfortunately, the vandals are registered and as far as I can see, autoconfirmed, so if they continue to create havoc , I'll have to consider blocking them. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I wanted you to close --> Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MTV Europe Music Award for Best Indian Act and speedy keep it. I had nominated it earlier. BTW, would you mind putting up a temp at the top of your talk page to skip to the bottom. Its too long to navigate. Harsh (talk) 09:28, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Once started, AfD usually run for 7 days, or longer if a consensus is not reached. As nominator, you are free to leave a message on it that you withdraw the nomination and perhaps an administrator will close it early. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Put up my withdrawal on that AfD. Would you close it now? Harsh (talk) 09:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Closed as: Keep - withdrawn by nominator. You are now free to further develop it, or merge and redirect it, whatever you find most suitable. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey Kudpung. This will be, if not our final newsletter, one of the final ones :). After months of churning away at this project, our final version (apart from a few tweaks and bugfixes) is now live. Changes between this and the last release include deletion tag logging, a centralised log, and fixes to things like edit summaries.

Hopefully you like what we've done with the place; suggestions for future work on it, complaints and bugs to the usual address :). We'll be holding a couple of office hours sessions, which I hope you'll all attend. Many thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:25, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in the discussion at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Proposal:_enable_HotCat_for_all_editors_by_default. Please note that I have now proposed 5 different, more nuanced versions of the original suggestion, to better gauge to what level (if any) we are willing to make Hot Cat more accessible. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:39, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung, The page for Thomas Hewitt Jones which was assumed copyright infringment is not - it was a correct biography of a well-known living music composer (we are his management). All links and information were correct - can you reinstate the previous version? Best, Michael — Preceding unsigned comment added by Metronomemus (talk • contribs) 03:21, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I fully understand that our rules and policies are not adequately explained to new users and can be confusing, but there is unfortunately nothing I can do about that. This article was in fact deleted due to not meeting several Wikipedia criteria:

The article was a close paraphrasing of several web sources including, but not only, this and this. Please see Wikipedia:Copyright violations.
Wikipedia's basic notability criterion is "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". This coverage should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. The sources provided were not reliable or did not provide sufficient coverage in number, depth, focus, and scope. If the subject is known for his work, third party sources are needed which discuss this. The subject seems like he could be notable enough for an article, but the sourcing needs to be addressed. Are there perhaps some news articles, books or magazine reviews, which discuss the subject?
As the subject's agent, you and/or your co-workers should not be creating or editing Wikinpedia articles about subjects you are closely related to. Please see Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. This also applies to the original creator of the article and any edits made by IP adresses that locate to these editors, your company, and/or any of the computers used.

If you feel you can write a new, neutral version, in which all claims are perfectly referenced and sourced with footnotes that comply with WP:BIO for biographies, WP:RS for sources, and WP:V for verifiability, you can start a new article in you user space at User:Metronomemus/Thomas Hewitt Jones (draft) where it will be reviewed by an established editor before being moved to mainspace. Please don't hesitate to ask me for any further advice. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:10, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at I Jethrobot's talk page.
Message added 06:01, 25 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 06:01, 25 September 2012 (UTC) ...(and I just had one small question about my candidacy over on my talk page). I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 06:12, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I was coming here to make fun of Jethrobot of another "double post", but dang, it is worse than I thought. He wants to go over to the dark side of adminship. But now, I can make fun of Kudpung. *cough* adminreview *cough* emailed during wikimania *cough* Bgwhite (talk) 06:37, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

It has indeed come to that. But probably not for a good while from now-- I still have a life to live! :) I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 07:20, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

You just blocked User:User:IAmCoolForever2023, and I was wondering if you could revert the moves the user made on September 23. The user previously moved several television network articles from their proper locations to locations he/she felt they belong without consensus or discussion back in August and early September. At that time, all pages were reverted back to their proper location by User:Drmies with a warning to not move any pages without consensus. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 07:22, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

It looks as if JamesBwatson has already done it in the last hour or so; if there any he missed that need a redirect deletion, let me know. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:44, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I checked them all over and they all seem to be good. Thanks for looking into them. :) Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:19, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Your comment also remind me to update my entry in the list Wikipedia:WikiProject_Worcestershire#Participants :-)

-- PBS (talk) 10:29, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm the user who wanted to read about Catarse, but found that the article had been deleted, so went ahead and started a create/delete ping-pong match. So now, after seeing it has been deleted a third time, I went through reading all the links I was directed to, such as:

Wikipedia:CSD#A7 Wikipedia:Why_was_the_page_I_created_deleted? Wikipedia:Field_guide_to_proper_speedy_deletion Wikipedia:Why_I_Hate_Speedy_Deleters

as well as the few links you provided on your talk page. I've always known Wikipedia to be a huge project, but now I'm getting an idea about how complicated all the policies and procedures can be...WOW!

Anyways, I'd like to be able to continue working on the Catarse article to get it to an acceptable level of quality. As open-source software, I understand that Catarse being software available for download on GitHub rather than web content excludes it from qualifying under A7, as mentioned at [Wikipedia:NOTCSD#Non-criteria], does it not?

I truly believe this is an important step in changing how businesses are funded By taking a similar step to Wikipedia's own inception and making the platform itself available to the public, Catarse allows anyone with an internet connection to start their own Crowd-funding service, something none of the other competitors allows.

I need to go to sleep now, because I work 12 hours of physycal labour per day, and need to rest.

Thank-you

--jonnynut 15:21, 25 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonnynut (talk • contribs)

Hi. The article was deleted three times already. That means that it has been reviewed by five experienced editors, two of whom are admins. Wikipedia's basic notability criterion is "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". This coverage should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. The current sources provided are not reliable (for instance the blog post), or not independent (such as hthe primary source website). If the subject is known for its use, third party sources are needed which discuss this,. The subject seems like it could be notable enough for an article, but the sourcing needs to be addressed. Are there perhaps sometablished national press articles, books or magazine reviews, which discuss the subject? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:44, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung! I occasionally see new pages that are just resumes of someone looking for a job and list their qualifications and contact info (I have to email oversight after I tag them). Does G11 apply to these types of pages? Electric Catfish (talk) 19:57, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Naturaly if it's reasonably clear that all they are doing is promoting themselves, G11 will apply, and you can also throw in A7 for good measure. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:11, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd like your opinion of my suggestion at Deletion Review. DGG ( talk ) 23:47, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the kind words and Wikilove! It is greatly appreciated.--Mr Fink (talk) 14:28, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vancouver Technical Secondary School, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Ferguson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Cncplayer's talk page.
Message added 16:59, 30 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Command and Conquer Expert! ^{speak to me...}_{review me...} 16:59, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I'll just stay away from those pages so I don't ruin any more. Command and Conquer Expert! ^{speak to me...}_{review me...} 17:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Apologies &amp; CVUA

Thanks

Carthage44 socking

Garrison Border Town of Elvas and its Fortifications

Hanley_Castle_High_School

Oh that's why

CSD Log

Could you please lock this page

Protection of Edin Džeko

A7-Animal

TRACY WEST MALONE AND MARK MALONE

Mentoring

Request

Canvassing

Red - Taylor Swift

Hi

Keelan RfA

I do assume good faith, and you have, indeed, erred; but I hope I'm not being rude.

War of the Ragamuffins

Thmc1 Now causing new problems! REPLY RQUESTED!

Autopatrolled

A barnstar for you!

thankyou

FYI

Stevia RFPP

Removing of maintenance tag templates

Wikipedia:Editor review/TheGeneralUser (2) Your review is required and will be greatly appreciated&nbsp;:)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Adoption

PERM2

A brownie for you!

A brownie for you!

Aicap123 block evasion

Please protect/fix this page

Congratulations!

CVUA

Plan of action

Re

RE: confirmation status - Jacob Foreman

Vandalism and Rollback Rights?

Editor Review/Eventual RFA

WP:PERM/R

WP:PERM/C

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Timeshift9 (2nd nomination)

A barnstar for you!

Non-admin "speedy deletion decline" policy or guideline?

Thank you

Page Curation update

A pie for you!

Page notices

The Signpost: 10 September 2012

A barnstar for you!

Peacocking of Sibichen K Mathew from multiple IPs

RFPP - Beast Cops

PERM3

A comment you made on RFPP

A barnstar for you!

Criticism

Advice needed for rights

HELP

tagging

List of largest peaceful gatherings.

A Little Bit Mad

Requested Move

Talkback

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Human rights abuses in Jammu and Kashmir

Advice on CSD

Indian education issues

About WP:RFP/RV

ANI closure on BWilkins

Starting a page with a Speedy Tag?

Hantavirus Risk in Yosemite

Case Lecen

You've got press

Monitor

The Signpost: 17 September 2012

CVU/NPP

Case Lecen, part 2

User:Galaxycat - Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled

Apologies & CVUA

Wikipedia:Editor review/TheGeneralUser (2) Your review is required and will be greatly appreciated :)